| Literature DB >> 35903247 |
Dai Shi1,2,3,4, Yiqiu Zhang1,2,3,4, Zhan Xu1,2,3,4, Zhan Si1,2,3,4, Yuan Cheng1,2,3,4, Dengfeng Cheng1,2,3,4, Guobing Liu1,2,3,4.
Abstract
Purpose: This study is aimed at investigating the feasibility of cetuximab (Cet) F(ab')2 fragment- (Cet-F(ab')2-) based single photon emission tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) for assessing the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression in digestive tumor mouse models.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35903247 PMCID: PMC9281432 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3748315
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Imaging ISSN: 1535-3508 Impact factor: 3.250
Figure 1Schematic diagram illustrating the synthesis of 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2. Please note that this figure only illustrates the synthesis of the radiolabel, and not that only one MAG3 molecule attaches to one cetuximab moiety.
Figure 2Evaluation of the EGFR expression in MGC803 and HT29 tumor cells. Western blots (a) and immunofluorescence of tumor cell (b) showed a higher EGFR expression level in MGC803 cells compared to HT29 cells.
Figure 3Verification of Cet-F(ab′)2 on its molecular weight, binding affinity to EGFR positive cells, and in vitro stability. (a) SDS-PAGE showing that the molecular weight of Cet-F(ab′)2 and cetuximab is 100 kDa and 150 kDa, respectively. (b) Immunocytochemistry showing high binding ability of Cet-F(ab′)2 and cetuximab to MGC803 cells. (c) SDS-PAGE illustrating the excellent stability of Cet-F(ab′)2 after incubation in PBS and 1% BSA over 24 h.
Figure 4The HPLC results showing ultraviolet profiles of MAG3-Cet, MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 and MAG3-Cet-Fc. (a) The HPLC result of MAG3-Cet. (b) The HPLC result of MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 and MAG3-Cet-Fc after digesting MAG3-Cet with IdeS protease. (c) The HPLC result of the mixture from (b) but after reaction with protein A beads. The residual MAG3-Cet and most of the MAG3-Cet-Fc were removed by protein A beads. (d) The HPLC result of the mixture of (a) and (c).
Figure 5Characterization of 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 in vitro. (a) The radio-HPLC result of 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2. (b) Stability assay of 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 in 1% BSA and NS. (c) Competition binding assay between 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 and unlabeled cetuximab to MGC803 cells (d, e). Representative saturation binding curve of 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 binding to MGC803 cells (d) and HT29 cells (e), indicating its higher affinity to MGC803 cells (Bmax = 5.68 × 10−19 mol ligands/cell, Kd = 0.6147 nM), compared to HT29 cells (Bmax = 1.66 × 10−19 mol ligands/cell, Kd = 1.008 nM).
Figure 6In vitro biodistribution and SPECT/CT imaging. (a) Biodistribution assay demonstrating that 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 uptake in MGC803 tumors peaked at 16 h after injection. (b) 99mTc-MAG3-Cet-F(ab′)2 SPECT/CT imaging showing significant different radionuclide uptake between an MGC803 tumor and a HT29 tumor (arrow). (c) Immunofluorescence showing the higher EGFR expression in MGC803 tumor slices compared with HT29 tumor slices. (d) Relationship between SPECT/CT image and immunofluorescence.